Hi, On Wed, 10 Nov 2010, Philipp Kern wrote: > On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 07:50:23PM +0100, Philipp Kern wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 11:35:54AM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > > 1) Switch back from sync() to fsync() before rename() (while keeping > > > the sync() code around for the benefit of other distributions > > > that might not want to switch just yet). So to avoid unrelated > > > I/O when there's background work being done for example. This > > > hack also only works on Linux where sync() is synchronous, so > > > it would unify that code path for all dpkg supported platforms. > > > > > > Bug: #588339 > > > > > > <http://git.hadrons.org/?p=debian/dpkg/dpkg.git;a=commitdiff;h=87740373> > > I'm still not sure we have all needed information. Would you mind doing > > a matrix what this change would cause? I.e. if we get performance > > regressions on ext4, btrfs or even ext3 with the squeeze kernel (we're > > really only interested in that one, not some random other revision) > > or if we even get data safety regressions. > > I also forgot to throw nfs into the picture.
I'm sorry, I won't have the time to do new benchmarks on this. The only benchmarks we have have been made by Sven Joachim: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=578635#20 (asyncsync is the switch to sync() instead of fsync() so the opposite of the above patch) He mentionned that without the sync() trick it takes 3 to 5 times longer to unpack a package. Sven, would you have time to provide some of the stats asked by the release team? We really need to upload dpkg this week so we must take a decision what goes in. Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer ◈ [Flattr=20693] Follow my Debian News ▶ http://RaphaelHertzog.com (English) ▶ http://RaphaelHertzog.fr (Français) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
